Maybe the mechanic has been recently changed to just sticking the right arm out? It seems the PU in video 3 did the same thing to signify he had an U3K, but then signaled the out since the batter could not advance.

I believe that's what they are teaching/doing at professional level now.

I agree with your interpretation of Play #3. I think, for the moment, the umpire forgot that there was a runner at 1st and immediately went into his "dropped third strike mechanic" and then realized there was a runner on 1st and called him out. Or, he completely forgot about the ramifications of having a runner on 1st and simply called the batter out for "giving up" and walking out of the dirt area around home. But the batter was out instantly. The umpire may got the call right for the wrong reason.

I think they must have changed the mechanic. They were using the safe sign for a while but they seem to have switched to an extended right arm and holding it there to indicate that a play is still pending. You see the same mechanic in Play #1. The catcher shows the umpire the ball to highlight "I caught it" and then sees the umpire's arm extended. He immediately recognized that as a signal that the umpire considered the pitch uncaught.

I don't understand the reason for the extended arm mechanic for 'no catch' on a pitch. The safe signal means 'no catch' everywhere else on the field, and it will never be mistaken for an out call. A safe signal with a verbal "no catch" says it best.

Nitpicking a signal like this? I don't get the point. It doesn't change a damned thing.

(And I'm not talking about the safe sign versus the extended right arm. I really don't care which signal is used there.)

The original question was whether PU made the right call, which would be inclusive of whether it was signaled correctly so all would know, thus the question about the mechanic.

It is not nit-picking, it is seeing something different than what has been conventional and wondering...

You think it's not nitpicking.

I think it is.

Was the right call made? Yes.

I was. And I wasn't nitpicking the PU. I'm sure his mechanics were by the book. I was nitpicking the book.

Nitpick or not, I find it fascinating, and somewhat disconcerting, that nobody can get on the same sheet when it comes to this common occurence. Why can't we just have a one-size-fits-all mechanic for all sanctioning bodies when it comes to U3Ks?? I thought after the whole Doug Eddings fiasco, the Safe sign and verbal "No Catch" would be the standard. But almost ten years later, it's still not.

I don't do much baseball, having opted to umpire fast-pitch softball the last few years. And "over there", there is no accepted standard. I believe NCAA requires the Safe/No Catch mechanic. But ASA wants umpires to give no verbal or signal; just signal the strike (verbal if it's a called third), and let the players figure out if the ball was caught or not. I think FED softball is the same as ASA.

Now it appears that MLB is using a completely unique mechanic. I don't get it....

I think you're ascribing more to "MLB" than you should from one umpire's mechanic on one play.

And since we don't knopw what he said, it might have been perfectly clear to all the participants in that game what was going on.

Unless it's the same umpire, plays 1 and 3 on the video show both PUs extending the right arm out on the call. I really haven't given it much thought, but maybe I need to watch a few MLB games more closely and see if it's the new mechanic, or just two umpires ironically doing the same strange signal.

#1 is Lincecum's no-hitter on 6/25/14 against San Diego.
#3 is Wainright (St. Louis) against Cincinnati on 5/25/14

In both cases the umpire is Adam Hamari.

Dang! That's impressive research. :)

I was at the Single A Fort Wayne Tincaps over the weekend and the plate umpire there used the same mechanic on the video for all of the uncaught third strikes.

Surely that indicates training rather than a rogue signal by an umpire.

I never liked the safe sign mechanic for an uncaught third strike because some of those are checked swings. Not only is there a question as to whether the ball was caught or not - there is some question as to whether the batter swung or not. There can sometimes actually be two issues that are simultaneously unclear.

I think some may interpret the safe sign to mean "the batter didn't go".

After all, what's the signal a base umpire gives on an appealed checked swing if, in his opinion, the batter did not swing? The safe sign!

I actually like the extended arm mechanic. It looks like a strike call (which a safe sign does not) and the fact that the umpire maintains that signal is a strong indicator that something is pending.